I've finally got my hands on the preliminary speakers schedule for Camp Allen, the nickname given Allen & Co.'s annual summer investment conference for the macho mogul set in bucolic Sun Valley, Idaho. The dates for this sleepaway for plutocrats are July 11th-16th. Highlight (or is it lowlight?): the idea of Barry Diller, Rupert Murdoch and Sir Howard Stringer interviewed by Michael Eisner. Oh, to be a fly on the wall for that. But I'm sure everyone will be uber-polite. My prediction is that no one but Eisner will get a word in edgewise. Interesting that it's Eisner, too, since he's tried to avoid attending the conference ever since he had his heart episode there. Read my secrets of Camp Allen column which ran 6/29/99 in New York magazine for a fuller understanding of this confab occurring since 1982. The Allen & Co. invitation used to be what separated the adolescents from the boys in Hollywood, a stamp of approval from Wall Street, confirmation that making feature films and sitcoms was an enviable enterprise. For so many years Camp Allen was a secretive gathering of the privileged white men who sat atop America's entertainment conglomerates and their families, a wilderness confab replete with river-rafting, picnic-table power-lunching, and (the whole purpose of the exercise) hush-hush deal-making. Its apex came back in 1994 as a full-page Vanity Fair spread complete with pedigree-enhancing headline -- "THE NEW ESTABLISHMENT" --to describe these Leaders of the Information Age. But then NYC investment banker Herbert Allen Jr.'s retreat changed subtlely in both style (there used be dildos jokingly given out as awards) and substance (its glitzy showbiz element downsized in favor of high-tech and Internet) in 1999. As a result, it's been far less interesting ever since. Still, 50 corporate jets line the tarmac at nearby Friedman Memorial Airport year after year (see actual photo below from there during conference week 2005):

Wednesday, July 12th -- 7:30 AM: THE TEN COMMANDMENTS FOR BUSINESS FAILURE BY DON KEOUGH (ex-chairman Coca-Cola, current chairman Allen & Co); 8:45 AM: eBAY INC.

Thursday, July 13th -- 7:30 AM: AMGEN INC.; 8:45 AM: PANEL DISCUSSION/CAN WE END OUR OIL ADDICTION?; 10:25 AM: PANEL DISCUSSION/SEEKING TO UNDERSTAND LATIN AMERICA 

Friday, July 14th -- 7:30 AM: THE IED CHALLENGE AND HOW WE ARE COUNTERING IT BY GENERAL (RET) MONTGOMERY C. MEIGS; 8:45 AM: BARRY DILLER, RUPERT MURDOCH AND SIR HOWARD STRINGER INTERVIEWED BY MICHAEL EISNER; 10:25 AM: A HEALTHCARE PRESENTATION BY ANDY GROVE (ex-chairman, Intel), WITH DR. TOBY COSGROVE, LAURA LANDRO (Wall Street Journal journalist) AND SECRETARY MICHAEL LEAVITT

Saturday, July 15th -- 8:30 AM: PANEL DISCUSSION/THE FAST AND THE CURIOUS - NEW TECHNOLOGIES RACING TO MARKET; 10:15 AM: WARREN BUFFETT INTERVIEWED BY CHARLIE ROSE

Previous: Secrets of Camp Allen column, 6/29/99, in New York magazine.  

Wow, so much misinformation and omission in recent newspaper articles, including The New York Times, Los Angeles Times and Wall Street Journal, about Walt Disney Co.'s incoming chairman John Pepper Jr, the ex-CEO of Procter and Gamble. Granted, he looks like he just got cast by ABC Family for an Americanized remake of Mr. Chips, fretting over whether his brood of preppies will horribly haze the new kid. (On second thought, maybe he's planning to do just that to still new Disney prez Bob Iger.) But The New York Times quoted experts claiming he lacks media experience and doesn't bring much to Disney's party. Huh? As if hiring former Senator George Mitchell was a stroke of genius by FrankenEisner and his board of flunkies. Look how well George didn't turn out. If you ask me, this new guy has Mitchell beat by a mile. Obviously, none of the following was in any of the official press releases: 1) The most obvious, first: as one of the largest consumer product advertisers on the planet, his ex-company's brands like Bounty, Crest and Pampers live or die on the basis of the success of its TV commercials and other media outlets. 2) P&G has long owned and operated TV soap operas; in fact P&G literally helped put the soap in soap operas. P&G produced and sponsored the first radio soap operas in the 1930s and became dominant when the soaps switched onto TV. P&G's past soaps have included Another World, The Edge of Night, Search for Tomorrow, Somerset and Texas. Two veteran soaps are still distributed by Proctor and Gamble, As the World Turns and Guiding Light. P&G also produced and sponsored a prime-time show, Shirley, starring Shirley Jones, produced TBS' first original comedy series, Down to Earth (successful enough to air 110 episodes), and distributed the syndicated comedy series Throb. And, most interestingly, Procter & Gamble Productions co-produced the global hit Dawson's Creek with Columbia Pictures Television that made Katie Holmes into a big enough celebrity to qualify her to become Tom Cruise's paramour and bearer of his child. 3) Pepper's extensive consumer products experience will help Disney's extensive line of consumer products. 4) P&G's anti-counterfeiting campaigns more or less mirror those set in motion by Disney against piracy and knockoffs. 5) P&G wrestles with a product boycott because of the company's animal testing claims, not unlike Disney's battle against a product boycott because of sweatshop claims. And, finally, 6) P&G is an expert at controlling bad press. (The company had to knock down all those ridiculous satanism rumors over the years.) Disney is an expert at controlling all press.

I'm told Warner Bros.' Superman Returns opened Wednesday with $19 million at the U.S. box office. That's only OK -- not great, not terrible, prompting box office guru analysis that the gay whisper campaign which crescendoed into newspapers and on the Internet hurt the movie's viability as did its star Brandon Routh's anonymity. (Box Office Mojo put the opening take at $21 mil, but rival studios told me that's too high.) Predictions are that Superman Returns could muster $100 million for July 4th weekend (which in many American households will continue from Friday through Tuesday). But even that barely puts the film in the 10 top opening Wednesdays. The problem stems not only from the movie's close to 2-hour 40-minute running time, its $200 mil-$250 mil budget, its mis-marketing campaign, or its emphasis on earnestness rather than simple ol'fashioned fun, but that the movie will get swamped its second weekend out by Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean 2, which continues tracking as the biggest movie opening ever. Major film critics have been split almost down the middle reviewing this film, although Bryan Singer's direction is generally lauded. Meanwhile, Warner Bros. has been desperately re-tooling its marketing campaign for the movie in light of the studio’s failure to stem the gay buzz surrounding Superman Returns. As late as this week, new TV ads transformed Routh from doe-eyed softie to macho techno-man of steel, borrowing heavily from other comic books successes like Spiderman and X-Men in its look and feel, with special effects set to pounding rap music (cue Terminator-like eyeball suck-out) and no thumpa-thumpa Gloria Gaynor within earshot. For more Hollywood summer movie madness, read my latest LA Weekly column, Super-Manly Makeovers, Slackers and Perkbusters. Meanwhile, the FBI on Wednesday broke up two movie piracy rings that were conspiring to profit from Superman Returns and other films. The mobs specialized in sneaking digital camcorders into theaters and filming newly released movies, then duplicating and distributing millions of bootlegs worldwide. The rings were based in New York City, but sent the counterfeit films using computer file-sharing networks to Pakistan, Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia, and other countries. The Motion Picture Association of America says black market schemes like this robbed the film industry of an estimated $18 billion in global revenue in 2005.

It was as recently as April that David Geffen attended a reception for the dean of Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism, Nick Lemann, at the Los Angeles home of Sony Pictures Entertainment chairman and CEO Michael Lynton. I'm told Geffen uninhibitedly demonstrated in front of several guests that his interest in buying the Los Angeles Times was still very much alive and well. Right now, David doesn't want to talk publicly about what he might, or might not, do, understandably. So it's been a while since there's been any substantive word connecting Geffen to a sale of the paper. Until yesterday. His name first surfaced in a September 2005 LAT story reporting the surprising news that Geffen met with parent company Tribune Chief Executive Dennis J. FitzSimons that summer to say he was interested in buying the media outlet. FitzSimons reportedly told the Dreamworks partner it was not for sale. For months, speculation ensued (mostly in the LAT's pages). Then, yesterday's Wall Street Journal wrote that the Chandler family, which owns its Tribune shares through trusts and is at loggerheads with FitzSimons and will become the company's largest shareholder in the wake of Tribune's not-very-popular $2 billion stock buyback scheme, is preparing to meet with Geffen and other potential buyers like Ron Burkle and Eli Broad, as well as private-equity and other investors. It's all an attempt by the family that once ruled the Spring Street roost to create some drama and force a breakup or sale of all or part of Tribune Co. 

Let me relate this: One time when I went to talk to Geffen in his Dreamworks office, he was sitting behind his desk and focused on the television. Specifically, he was concentrating on a CNN report about developments in the Middle East. While I took a seat and waited for him to acknowledge me, we sat there in silence listening to the CNN reporter and then anchor for about seven-to-ten minutes. After that, I could tell that he reluctantly pulled himself away from the foreign briefing to deal with the more trivial matter of Hollywood. In this day and age when foreign news holes are becoming smaller and foreign reporting budgets leaner at media outlets across this country, a wannabe owner who cares so deeply about international events bodes well for the LAT. Slate's Jack Shafer recently coined a term, the "New Vanity Press Moguls," claiming that typically they are "confident beasts ... [who] usually join the game because they're already bulging at the seams with profitable investments and are bored with their yachts, airplanes, mansions, sports franchises, race horses, and priceless works of art, and they view publications (correctly) as exciting diversions from their conventional holdings. Some vanity moguls buy into journalism for ideological reasons, hoping their investment will move the public debate in their direction. For others, the attraction is political: They're frustrated politicians who don't have the time, patience, talent, or resume to sell themselves to voters." While famously liberal Geffen may well fall into the latter category, he also may be better explained by the category of newshound.

My own greatest fear is that the LAT will be taken over by Philip Anschutz, that Colorado billionaire and Christian conservative whose Clarity Media Group has a new network of Examiner newspapers in San Francisco, Washington DC, and Baltimore. LA would be a natural new expansion since he desperately needs a media shill for his Downtown LA entertainment-sports-housing-hotel holdings and edifices and complexes already put together or still being planned or under construction. Note that Anschutz has already trademarked the name "Examiner" in Los Angeles and dozens of U.S. cities.

So today a rumor swept Hollywood about recent gunplay in a crowded lobby of a top talent agency. Here's the reality: I've been told about an accidental gun discharge incident at Creative Artists Agency in Beverly Hills on January 28th at 1:50 p.m. You first need to know that no one was hurt: it was a Saturday and the lobby was empty, and only three people were in the entire building, not including the security guards. And the security guard was employed by Gavin de Becker & Associates, which protects CAA and William Morris and about 1,400 other companies and is widely regarded as one of the leading firms in the field of public figure protection and threat assessment. De Becker (pictured left) told me tonight: “Even though accidental discharges are frequent occurrences in law enforcement, the military, and the private sector, we are grateful to have the lowest rate of accidental discharges I know of: two incidents in 31 years. The former employee involved in this accidental discharge was trained by the U.S. Marines, passed the state training requirements, and completed our academy – and we are grateful that the incident never posed any danger to anyone.”

I've learned what happened: the guard was working the 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. shift and at his security post when he followed standard procedure and checked the "417" which is security codespeak for taking the firearm out of its locked lockbox and examining it. He looked inside the chamber and noticed there was a round of ammo. And then in attempting to clear the chamber, he reported the gun went off accidentally. The shot left a small round chip in the building's lobby floor. Sources told me the guard appeared before a board of review with de Becker's firm and was subsequently terminated. As for the incident itself, it was reported immediately to the guard's de Becker supervisor, who reported it to a de Becker partner. That next workday, January 30th, the president and co-partner of the de Becker company, Michael LaFever, personally went to CAA to inform the agency about what had happened. That same day, De Becker personally emailed a notice about the accidental discharge to the director of the California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services including the guard's own report. I have confirmed that no report was made to the Beverly Hills police by de Becker's firm. There are all sorts of lame jokes I could make about this incident, but I don't find much funny about guns. Finally, De Becker's firm, which has had CAA as a client for 25 years, is still protecting the agency.

UPDATE: It's True: Gawker's Jesse Oxfeld Canned 

I find it shameful that Dow Jones/Marketwatch media critic Jon Friedman has chosen to write such a misogynist piece published today (I refuse to link to it) that trivializes me and what I do. It begins with a bit-o-praise under the headline, "In-your-face Finke keeps Hollywood honest. Nobody writes tougher stuff than this LA Weekly scribe...), then proceeds to dissemble. No mention of my extensive journalism background. No mention of my recent award (which he told me was supposed to be the peg for the profile). He wouldn't have dared write an article like this about a male business journalist working for a mainstream newspaper. Several comments attributed to me were uttered by Friedman, while others were post-interview phone chatter put on the record by him contrary to our agreement. In several places, my quotes were taken out of context, and in one place his characterization of my work is not supported by the facts. He also allows someone who isn't a journalistic colleague, who has never met me and who has never spoken to me, to disparage me even though there's no basis whatsoever for such a personal judgment call. I accepted Friedman's stated purpose that he intended to write about myself and my work, and I was prepared to take any and all legitimate hits. Instead, he presented me as a carnival sideshow act. Everyone knows how hard it is to craft a serious career and reputation, and how easily it can be undone by an article like this. 

2ND UPDATE: Re Jesse Oxfeld's posting of our email exchange, I completely stand behind what I wrote to him. I do think media people's feet should be held to the fire for tossing off "expert" and deeply personal comments about individuals they don't know. Why in the world should I not rebuke what he said? Now I've received a public retraction and apology from him, albeit snarky ones, and I'm satisfied.

If you've got $2,995 burning a hole in your wallet, then that's the cost of Nielsen Analytics' and The Movie Advisory Board's new 100-page "Modern Movie Experience" study -- billed as "a report on moviegoer behavior today, possibilities for tomorrow, and the impact of digital technologies on the movie value chain." Quite a mouthful, that. Here's more: "Declines in movie theater attendance, coupled with an explosion in digital entertainment alternatives, has put the movie industry under particularly intense scrutiny. Moviegoing, once seen as a staple of shared mass audience entertainment, is rapidly changing. This report follows the evolving viewpoint of the uber-media consumer, one which movie studios, theater owners, television networks, agencies and advertisers need to understand in order to keep up. 'The Modern Movie Experience' analyzes consumers' movie theater attendance and consumption habits, and sheds new light on why U.S. theater attendance has declined." It's based on an analysis of over 2,600 Movie Advisdory Board members. Also explored are consumers' usage and preferences of movie technologies such as DVD, VOD, the Internet, and subscription services (i.e. NetFlix or Blockbuster). Feel free to email me a copy once you've bought it. But if you also can't afford it, I'm now going to save you some $$$. I haven't read it, but how much do you wanna bet it says: Hey, if a movie is good, consumers will go see it. Otherwise, they choose to save gas and money and stay home and watch video-on-demand, cable or satellite, or a DVD. Or maybe they'll just play a video game or listen to Ipods because most new movies suck big-time.

UPDATED: The report's co-author Adrienne Becker explains: "Actually, the new Nielsen analysis does not paint as simple a portrait as you guessed. Certainly if a movie sucks, moviegoers are not going to pay for it in any which way; no great insight there worth the price tag. What the report attempts to explain however, are some of the forces of transformative change now taking place, providing evidence to explain the change as well as the accompanying challenges and opportunities. Let me give you an example.  We're in a day and age of what I call "participatory media," that is the consumer plays a greater role than just end-game consumption...in fact, the consumer can - increasingly - play a role in writing, green-lighting, funding, developing, marketing and distributing content, and in this case, long form content. So, it is one hypothesis based on the insights of over 2,600 moviegoers, that if you further empower their participatory role, you can keep them engaged. Think about using digital networks to dynamically present movies in the theater based on the consumer's expressed choice, especially when you have surplus inventory of seats and a 24/7 read on demand and price sensitivity. Or consider the possibility that
moviegoers will be offered tools at the theater to edit their own trailers and distribute them right from their cell phones. Industry institutions which respect the new participant's power and provide tools to support and manage it can survive and thrive in this new world. Entertainment today caters to personal impulse...the motion picture industry is
working towards acknowledging this and adapting and the Nielsen report attempts
to provide an empirical catalyst for those conversations.  If the Nielsen report can even partially achieve this somewhat lofty goal, it's worth many millions more." 

The film industry magazine Fade In named Deadline Hollywood Daily as one of its Top 100 Coolest Film Sites On The Net in its latest issue with this description: "Nikki Finke’s well-reported daily blog on the business of show." Thanks!

I'm told Sony's Da Vinci Code passed $700 million worldwide gross today. Adding $4 mil domestically and $9 mil internationally this weekend put the total take at $701.3 million. The movie is now the 22nd best earner globally (and 12th best internationally). The breakdown of the total haul is $205.5 for U.S. and $495.8 mil overseas (which was down only 37% despite the huge World Cup weekend). Initially, Sony hoped the movie would take in $500 mil worldwide by summer's end. And here it is not even July.

UPDATED: *Adam Sandler is looking like American moviegoers' favorite comedian as his latest Click scored his fifth $40 million+ opening weekend today to become the nation's No. 1 film. The Sony comedy about a man whose TV remote turns into a life remote debuted with $40 mil at the box office. Right now in Hollywood there are very few actors working today that can generate that kind of audience drawing power. The studio's exit polling showed Sandler's audience was 51% female and 49% male, while 50% were under age 25. Sony and Sandler, which have been a profitable box office pairing for some time now (Big Daddy, 50 First Dates, Mr. Deeds, Anger Management), had their best ever opening in Austrailia so Click may be their broadest film with international moviegoers. (Usually, U.S.-made comedies don't translate to big box office overseas.) Click is Sony's seventh #1 film of 2006, unlike 2005 when much of the studio's fare bombed with moviegoers.

There's more good news for Sony: Da Vinci Code Hits $700 Mil Worldwide today. I’m told Sony’s Da Vinci Code passed $700 million worldwide gross today. Adding $4 mil domestically and $9 mil internationally this weekend put the total take at $701.3 million. The movie is now the 22nd best earner globally (and 12th best internationally). The breakdown of the total haul is $205.5 for U.S. and $495.8 mil overseas (which was down only 37% despite the huge World Cup weekend). Initially, Sony hoped the movie would take in $500 mil worldwide by summer’s end. And here it is way past that and not even July. Meanwhile, on Saturday, an Indian mob ransacked a multiplex playing the Da Vinci Code after a state ban on screening the film was lifted. (see below)

In other movie news this weekend, Disney/Pixar's Cars finished its third weekend out with $23 mil, and a total $156 mil gross. Paramount's Jack Black comedy Nacho Libre was third with $12 mil (total $52.4 mil), and Universal's The Fast and The Furious 3 was fourth with $9.5 mil (total $42.7 mil). But continuing as the biggest box office surprise was Focus/Rogue Pictures's Waist Deep, the other movie opening this weekend: playing in only 1,004 theaters, the urban drama pulled in $9.5 mil to tie for 4th place.*

I'm told Adam Sandler's low-concept comedy Click about a man and his TV remote, turned life remote, opened with $14.5 million Friday to be the No. 1 movie at U.S. theaters. Sandler's audience wrangler won't have any trouble scoring its predicted low 40s debut weekend $$$. This is Sony's seventh #1 opening this year, unlike the studio's miserable 2005. Meanwhile, Sony and Sandler continue as a profitable box office pairing: Big Daddy, 50 First Dates, Mr. Deeds, Anger Management, have all gone over $40 million their opening weekends. (Only Spanglish and Punch-Drunk Love were gross nightmares.) Disney/Pixar's Cars finished No. 2 Friday down  29% with $6.5 mil (weekend estimate is mid 20s). But Sandler manhandled "The New Belushi": not only did Jack Black's Nacho Libre record a macho drop of 64%, but the Paramount flick only earned $3.9 mil Friday. Universal's The Fast and The Furious 3 fell a big 67% taking in just $3.2 mil Friday for 5th place. The big surprise in screens was the other movie opening this weekend, Focus/Rogue Pictures' Waist Deep playing in only 1,000+ theaters; yet the urban drama pulled in $3.3 mil to score 4th place. Once again, biz was up for the 6th week in a row -- and that's even before this summer's dynamic duo of draws Superman Returns and Pirates of the Caribbean 2 have yet to arrive in theaters. More as it comes in...

Meanwhile, Sony's post ban-lifted attempts to screen the Da Vinci Code in one part of populated Andhra Pradesh state in India today were unsuccessful when protesters under the banner of the Christian United Front ransacked a Hyderabad multiplex and caused extensive property damage, forcing the management to suspend the film's screening. The mob, carrying banners and placards describing the film as "Devil's Code," barged in to the multiplex located near the Hussain Sagar lake in the heart of the city even as people eager to watch the movie were standing in line for the tickets of the first show. The activists even broke the Prasad Imax's box office window (as opposed to breaking the box office record), so the film could not be shown there. As if Da Vinci Code didn't have enough global moviegoers after finishing No. 1 overseas even after five weeks out, it hoped to add big numbers among another 75 million potential Indians this weekend. That's because a high court OK'd the film's release in Andhra Pradesh, one of the states where the local government banned the religious thriller a day before its release. I'm told the studio had the film available in English and Hindi there today. Sony also is releasing DVC in Oman and Qatar, two Mideast countries where the release was delayed. Today, Da Vinci Code received "remarkable response" from filmgoers in Qatar, according to newswire reports received from the halls where the picture was screened. So, gradually, Sony is winning its censorship fight to have the film seen around the world. Meanwhile, Da Vinci Code is up to $202.6 million in U.S. box office gross after Friday and racing towards a $700 million global haul.

Previous: Da Vinci Does Bollywood Amid Protests, Jack Goes Slack! Cars No. 1

It's the end of Aaron Spelling, and the end of a TV era. To understand his once-upon-a-time utter dominance in the medium, you have to put together both Jerry Bruckheimer's and Dick Wolf's TV empires on one network, and then you'll understand. So I'm sharing with you this sit-down interview I did with him in 1989 way back when I was a Calendar writer for the Los Angeles Times covering the TV biz. Let me set the scene: he had this gargantuan office on what was then the Warner's Hollywood lot, and on his payroll a black guy in a white uniform (a porter? a waiter? heck, there's no PC term for that) serving us drinks. I let Aaron do his tapdance routine for me for about half an hour. Then I asked him, "Gee, if things are going so great for you, then why is this the first time in a generation of TV viewers you won't have any shows on ABC?" He looked like I had sucker-punched him. But then he got really, really angry. Not at me, but at the TV industry and network suits. It turned into a very revealing interview, one of those rare times in Hollywood when candor actually occurs between a mogul and a journalist. (But Aaron hated this article and regretted being so truthful. He gave his PR guy Warren Cowan many Maalox moments because of it.) After this humiliating TV dry spell, Spelling recouped and reinvented himself and his production company with Beverly Hills 90210, Melrose Place, Charmed, and so many other crappy shows that nevertheless we all craved. (Exception: Seventh Heaven, a cut above content-wise.) We won't see his ilk again, and TV is both worse and better off for it:

CAN SPELLING CAST HIS SPELL AGAIN?
VETERAN PRODUCER IS SEARCHING FOR THE MAGIC TOUCH IN A NEW ERA
Two years ago, Aaron Spelling had an idea for a dramatic and, he thought, different television series about a divorced family as told through the eyes of a little boy. Besides voiceovers (later used by The Wonder Years), its main innovation was its format -- two back-to-back half-hour shows, one about the boy's weekdays with his mother, the other about his weekends with his father. "I got to tell you," Spelling confided, "I was convinced we were going to sell it." But ABC's programming bosses didn't want it."I could tell they thought I had come in with a very unique idea. But they didn't think I could pull it off," he recalls. "I knew they were saying, 'If only we could do it with (TV producers) a Bochco or a Zwick and Herskovitz.' "

Not so long ago, ABC would have been happy to do anything with Spelling, who had been cranking out hits for the network since Burke's Law in 1963 -- most of that time under an exclusive contract. But then Capital Cities bought the network in 1985 and upset the status quo. Suddenly TV's king of trash and flash, who once programmed one-third of ABC's prime-time lineup with the likes of Starsky & Hutch, Charlie's Angels, The Love Boat and Dynasty, found himself unable to sell any new hour-long series for fall '86. And a half-hour sitcom with Lucille Ball bellyflopped so badly that ABC aired just eight shows. But the worst was still to come that year when Brandon Stoddard, then ABC's new entertainment division president, publicly promised that the network would no longer be "Aaron's Broadcasting Company." The implication, which wasn't lost on either Spelling or his competitors, was that Spelling not only couldn't deliver the sort of quality shows that Stoddard wanted, but also even bore some responsibility for ABC's nosedive in the ratings in the mid-1980s. "Sure, that hurt," Spelling admits in a recent interview at his gargantuan office on the Warner Hollywood lot. "I've become a little whipping boy for the network. But something has happened to me now that I never used to feel. I get really hurt when they say nasty things."

Today, three decades after he got his start in Hollywood and nearly one year after the expiration of his 18-year pact with ABC, Spelling is in a not-so-enviable position -- at age 65, the once-powerful insider is an outsider. The man who many thought was immune to the up-and-down fortunes of the TV industry is now just another producer trying to sell his programming -- albeit a super-rich one who's building a 56,500-square-foot home in Holmby Hills. "It's a more difficult time for Aaron than ever before," says Lynn Loring, a one-time Spelling protegee who now is vice president for development at MGM-UA Television. "When he was at the top of the game with truly no competitors, Aaron Spelling was God. That's not true anymore."

The good news, as Spelling sees it, is that he now can take his ideas to NBC, CBS, Fox, syndication and cable, instead of having to rely only on ABC's wants and whims. The bad news is that many within the industry consider his unique brand of escapist fantasy and action-adventure shows to be out-of-step with today's emphasis on half-hour comedies and more realistic dramas such as L.A. Law and thirtysomething. Spelling, however, believes the programming pendulum is swinging back in his direction. "I think there's a terrible lack of entertainment on TV these days," he contends. "The one insatiable appetite that people watching television share is to escape. And if you have 9 or 10 'thirtysomethings' on the air, you will drive this audience away farther than we've contributed to driving this audience away already."

As proof of this, he points to the surprise success of his new NBC series about scantily clad nurses, Nightingales. Though reviled by the critics, it nevertheless has been winning its time period at 10 p.m. Wednesday nights, prompting top executives at CBS to call Aaron Spelling Productions and ask, 'Can you do that for us?' " On the other hand, Spelling's Dynasty and HeartBeat are dying on ABC against NBC's invincible Thursday night lineup, and a much-publicized sequel to Charlie's Angels for Fox Broadcasting has become mired in legal wrangling and has been scrapped as a series idea, though TV movies haven't been ruled out.

While Spelling maintains that he would like to do more quality programs on the order of his recent CBS-TV movie Day One, about the development of the atom bomb, he complains that network executives don't often trust him to make them. Forgotten, he says, are his series Mod Squad and Family which were hailed as breakthrough programs in their time, and his TV movie about anorexia nervosa, Best Little Girl in the World, which won critical acclaim in 1981. "I'm in a 'Catch 22' situation. It's where they pigeonhole an Aaron Spelling and say, 'He can only do this,' and 'He can't do that.' It's about to drive me crazy."

MGM-UA's Loring, who used to work in Spelling's development department, says he only has himself to blame for his current dilemma. "I think what happened is he put himself into a bind where he continued to turn out what ABC was asking him to turn out -- The Love Boat, Fantasy Island and that rash of shows that made not only the network successful but also Aaron Spelling successful as well. But one has to wonder why he didn't use the power that he had at ABC to do more quality shows. So Aaron says ABC wouldn't accept them from him. Well, he's now able to work with two other networks at least. Where's his new Family? Where's his new Best Little Girl? Instead he gives us Nightingales. And speaking now not as an executive but as a woman, I find that show offensive."

But Spelling defends shows like Nightingales, which he boasts was his idea. "Just take a week and see what the top 10 or 15 shows were and how many were entertainment, and how many were thought-provoking," he says. "I think you'd be surprised." Talking to Spelling, who alternates between sounding incredibly cynical about Hollywood ("As Shakespeare said, there's are only seven plots anyway") and as wide-eyed as the first day he arrived from Texas, it's clear he likes his TV the old-fashioned way. And, just as his personal style hasn't changed over the years -- he still wears sweaters and sneakers to the office -- neither have his ideas about TV. He truly likes plots as simple as boy meets girl, characterization that's not too multi-dimensional, and lots and lots of happy endings. As he himself says, "I make shows I want to watch."

Nevertheless, over the past three years, he has revamped the TV side of his production company to bring in younger people. For instance, his vice president for creative affairs now is 31-year-old Ilene Chaiken. "If the company is going to change and start doing fresher things," he notes, "it starts with its development people." Under this new team, his company has pilot orders from all three networks for fall, though no commitments yet. Spelling maintains he's trying to give them that "something different" in programming they all seem to want. "But I wish someone would explain to me what they mean by doing it differently," he laments, throwing up his arms in disgust. "I can honestly say that I don't know what the networks want anymore."

For CBS, Spelling is making Curse of the Corn People, set in a small farming town in Kansas, about a group of high school graduates whose one ambition is to make a low-budget horror movie on the order of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Even his development director recognizes it's an "unusual notion" for a series. But Spelling sees it as an "almost twentysomething. " Also in development for CBS is a more conventional murder-mystery show about a chess master and his manager, who crisscross the globe playing matches and solving crimes. Meanwhile, for NBC, "we're getting into comedy in a big way," Spelling maintains. His company is developing a half-hour situation comedy based on Robin Schiff's play "Ladies Room," which is set in a women's restroom. Titled Temporarily Yours, the pilot has been written by Schiff, who pursues the same women-talking-about-men themes as in her play. Spelling seems to be NBC Entertainment President Brandon Tartikoff's newest best friend. In 1986, when he first went to talk to the programming chief, Tartikoff met him at the elevator with a band playing "The Yellow Rose of Texas." And, just recently, as Spelling and CBS President Laurence Tisch were dining at Chasen's, Tartikoff arranged to be their waiter. "It's so nice to be cared about," Spelling says. "It's been a long time since I've been treated that way."

When discussing what he calls his "love-hate" relationship with ABC's Stoddard, Spelling sounds bitter about the way he has been treated him. Presently, Spelling has only one pilot in the works for ABC -- Sam Berdoo, a series about a "hard-boiled" private eye who's raising his dead buddy's teen-age daughter -- but not for lack of trying. "For instance," he adds, "we did a whole presentation for a show about people who threw reunions. And, low and behold, the things that they objected mostly to were the reunions that dealt with serious subjects. And, yet, if we had submitted those flash-and-dash Love Boat, Fantasy Island, Finder of Lost Love story lines again, I thought they'd say, 'That's exactly what we don't want to do. Aren't you ever going to grow up, Aaron?' "

Still, if Dynasty and HeartBeat are cancelled, and Sam Berdoo not picked up, that would mean a Spelling-less ABC -- a first for a generation of TV viewers. While Stoddard, who resigned last week, wouldn't comment for this article, his right-hand man, Ted Harbert, ABC's senior vice president for programming, did. "I think even Aaron will admit that a network's over-reliance on any one producer is a mistake," Harbert says of the decision not to renew Spelling's exclusivity contract last April. "And that's not to say anything derogatory about Aaron. It's just that we were depending on one guy to give us all our good shows. So we had to increase our odds by opening the doors." Harbert also acknowledges that other producers felt they wouldn't get a fair shake at the network -- or much less a good time period -- unless their initials were A.S. "Some of it was true, some of it was not true. But if the perception was there," he explains, "that caused a big problem for us. So we really did have to create a new perception."

"I guess I should apologize to ABC that Love Boat was on 10 years, and Dynasty 9 and Hotel 5 and Vega$ 4 and Matt Houston 3. I guess that was my fault the shows were successful," Spelling bristles. "Frankly, I think Stoddard had to do something when he took over. And the thirtysomethings and the China Beaches is the direction he chose to go. But tell me," he adds, "what shows in this new genre are really successful?"

Dave Lane, head of ABC's affiliates and general manager of WFAA-TV in Dallas, is one of those Spelling critics who applaud the network's decision to reduce the producer's influence. "When Brandon came in, he said that over time he needed to evolve his own relationships with the producers he felt comfortable working with. And, quite honestly, his philosophy didn't square with what Aaron Spelling was producing at the time."

Spelling has little good to say about the new generation of TV makers that Stoddard brought in to replace him. Noting the current hype surrounding Steven Bochco, the writer-producer who co-created Hill Street Blues, L.A. Law and Hooperman, and who has been given a long-term exclusive deal to create more series for ABC, Spelling asks cattily: "Where's the screaming about the Bochco contract? I don't hear anybody saying, 'My God, with all these series he's doing for ABC, how are we ever going to get a show on? Look," Spelling adds, "I think Steve Bochco is brilliant and L.A. Law and Hill Street Blues were great. But then let's see his track record. You think Hooperman is a big-rated show? And was Bay City Blues a big smash?"

Picking up the two-for-four metaphor, Bochco responds: "If I were in the major leagues and I was hitting .500, George Steinbrenner would probably make me a wealthy guy."

As for thirtysomething, which won the Emmy Award last season as television's best dramatic series, Spelling says it's "not a show I can watch every week. It has a little too much angst and whining for me. If it weren't for the critics, 'thirtysomething' would never have made it. There's no doubt about it." MGM's Loring, whose studio produces the show, replies: "Too much angst? Unlike Dynasty? If you want to talk about angst and depression and insanity and any kind of human emotion on a scale of one to 10, then Dynasty has hit the highest number on the Richter scale."

Well, then, how about ABC's Vietnam series China Beach? "I liked the pilot," Spelling says. "But I just don't know if I want to see the gore of everything that happens there." On the other hand, Spelling thinks Stephen J. Cannell's Wiseguy on CBS is "terrific. I get a pang every time I see a successful show, to be very honest with you. I go, 'Dammit, why didn't we think of that?' I wished I had recognized the immense talent of that star (Ken Wahl)."

If Spelling is finding himself hamstrung in the TV business, he claims his freedom may lie in feature films, even though his record of success there is spotty at best. "Lately, it's been easier to sell theatrical movies than TV shows. In movies, there is no stigma for me." After the box-office hit Mr. Mom," Spelling's most recent movies -- including the adaptation of the play " 'night, Mother," and fluffier efforts "Surrender" starring Sally Fields and Satisfaction with Justice Bateman -- have fallen flat with audiences. This year, Tri-Star will be releasing his company's latest production, The Von Metz Incident, starring Gene Hackman and Dan Aykroyd.

No matter how his fortunes fare in TV into the 1990s, Spelling in the end is content to be judged "on my staying power in the business." That was the main theme that emerged last September when he was honored by the Museum of Broadcasting at a star-studded lovefest. And that also appears to be the main theme of an as-yet-untitled book of memoirs he's currently writing for Little, Brown about his experiences. "It will say that if you think hard enough and work long enough, a lot of your dreams can come true in the TV business," he says. "But the problems of TV now are immense. We can't treat this anymore like a candy story where, no matter what you put on the air, every producer and every network gets rich. We are in a hard-crunch business now and I hate it."

So why doesn't he just forget the whole thing? "If you want to know the honest-to-goodness truth," he confides, "I just love it, including the aggravation."

Here's the latest summer movie tracking news: I'm told Sony's Click will become No. 1 at the box office and hit the so-called "Adam Sandler sweet spot" of at least $40-$45 mil its opening weekend. The bigger news I've learned is that Pirates of the Caribbean 2 (opening July 7th) now has the highest combination of "definite interest" and "first choice" ever tracked by the research groups. That backs up my previous reporting that this Disney blockbuster is gonna blow everything else out of the water. (See Pirates 2 Biggest Opening Ever) But the biggest news I've got is that Superman Returns is gaining strength in all quadrants. (For weeks, Warner Bros. execs have been covered in flop sweat.) Remember I told you previously that Superman Returns was not tracking well enough to rival X-Men 3's big box office opening? Since then, wanna-see has picked up considerably among men of all ages. Still, the Wednesday (June 28th) opening makes its Fourth of July holiday weekend total tough to call. Spiderman 2 opened on the Wednesday before July 4th and did $40 mil that first day and went on to make $88 mil Friday-Saturday-Sunday for a cume of $192 mil Wednesday-through-Tuesday. The experts tell me that's probably an unreachable goal for Superman Returns, but the movie should haul in about 2/3 of that. Spiderman 2 ended up taking in $370 mil, so Superman Returns has to do at least $250 mil to avoid humiliation. (Especially considering the film's production budget was at least $210 mil, though insiders tell me it's probably sped past $250 mil by now.) The other movie opening that weekend, Fox's The Devil Wears Prada (June 30th) is tracking well with older females.

Warner Bros.' marketing of Superman Returns is a tragicomedy of errors upon errors. More to the point, I'm told Bryan Singer is fed up with it. For good reason. I could go on and on, but I'll hit the low points for now. The gay buzz sparked by one-sheets presenting Brandon Routh as the Babyfaced Superbod. Then Warner's ridiculous panic because of gay-themed Superman stories in, god forbid, The Advocate. Singer's own desperate damage control that this was "probably the most heterosexual character in any movie I've ever made." Things got so out of hand, I'm told, that Warner's president of production Jeff Robinov sought advice from his Matrix pal Joel Silver on how the hell to sell Superman in a more butch fashion. After all, when it comes to making and marketing manly movies to manly men, Silver's the manliest. (I've learned that uber-heterosexual Joel loved Superman Returns when Jeff showed it to him.) I also hear that Warner Bros. screwed up the film's promotion on MySpace.com, which has become a key component of any good campaign. Not only was Superman Returns late to display there, but for many days the wrong opening date was posted since no one bothered to update when the film's opening was moved earlier to June 28th. Oh, and lest I forget, Warner's smarmy marketing tactics that provoked bloggers to begin leaking weeks ahead of time Superman Return's oh-so-secret surprise ending.    

UPDATED: *Attempts by Sony to screen the film in one part of Andhra Pradesh today were unsuccessful when dozens of protesters under the banner of the Christian United Front raided a Hyderabad multiplex and damaged property extensively, forcing the management to suspend the film's screening. The mob even broke the box office window (as opposed to breaking the box office record), so the film could not be shown. Also, the state government is appealing the High Court decision.* 

As if the Da Vinci Code didn't have enough global moviegoers after finishing No. 1 overseas even after five weeks out, it adds 75 million potential more this weekend. Sony is relieved now that a high court in India just OK'd the film's release in Andhra Pradesh, one of the states where the local government banned the religious thriller. I'm told the studio will have the film available in English and Hindi to about 70% of the population there by Saturday. "We have been waiting to watch the film because the controversy surrounding it only added to our curiosity," one youth told the local paper. He along with friends had planned to watch the movie June 2, but the government banned its screening a day before it was to be released. "I will watch the first show of the movie because I have read so much about it in newspapers," said another college student. I've also learned that Sony is appealing the ban on DVC's release in the state of Tamil Nadu. So then the movie would have 90% coverage of India. Sony also is releasing DVC in Oman and Qatar, two Mideast countries where the release was delayed. UPDATED: *The film received "remarkable response" from filmgoers in Qatar, according to newswire reports received from the halls where the picture is screened.* So, gradually, Sony is winning the censorship fight to have the film seen around the world. Meanwhile, Da Vinci Code passed $200 million in U.S. box office gross Tuesday night and is racing now towards a $700 million global haul.

Parent company Tribune and  the Los Angeles Times must be members of the cockeyed Optimists Club. How else to explain that, in their first public remarks since the Chandler family went to war against them, they claimed "trends" expected to boost revenue during the second half include additional advertising due to a larger number of movie releases (as well as new sales incentives by several major automakers). Sheesh, will these bozos never learn? Donald Grenesko, Tribune's senior vice-president of finance and administration, predicted that movie ads -- which have been slumping for several quarters -- should be "more plentiful" in the second half of 2006 as film studios plan a bigger slate of releases. So New Line is suddenly gonna come running to the geriatric LA Times to hawk teen scream Snakes on a Plane and other film fare aimed at younger audiences? Yeah, when pigs fly. After all, weakness in entertainment advertising has been the bane of the LAT, which represents about a quarter of the Tribune Co.'s publishing revenue. For a while now, I've been tracking how all the Hollywood studios have cut their newspaper display advertising budgets, and especially their LAT display advertising budgets, to the bone. (See my most recent, Q1 2006 LA Times = Big Movie Ad Loser). Not even the Hollywood Reporter's veteran VP and associate publisher Lynne Segall can make up the difference now that she's moving into the new LAT position of VP for entertainment advertising (i.e. movies, theater, music, media, culture, TV, home entertainment, and sports). Pity, she's the new captain on the sinking deck of the Titanic.

So now it's all-too-apparent why Sony's corporate flackery was working 24/7 to generate those many media puff pieces about Sir Howard Stringer (see my previous No Sony Product Gets This Much Great PR). Because he was facing 7,000 shareholders for the first time as CEO at Thursday's annual meeting. Specifically, facing grumbling, disgruntled, worried shareholders -- to use the adjectives in the AP story out of Tokyo -- demanding to know why Sony was losing so much money,  After all, Howard's been head of the Japanese corporate for a year, yet Sony's 2006 1st quarter losses widened to 66.5 billion yen ($578 million) from a 56.5 billion yen loss a year ago. All that media praise for Stringer was an integral part of his pre-meeting strategy. Why? Because the Japanese traditionally believe everything they read, or so I've been told over the years, and these U.S. articles get distributed widely in that country's press.

There were many moments at the annual meeting where this could have been Michael Eisner facing Disney shareholders redux. Like the Japanese woman who was unhappy that the Sony shares she bought at 14,000 yen ($120) are now worth only 4,940 yen ($43). "I bought shares in mighty Sony,' AP quoted her as complaining to Stringer et al, "What are you going to do about this?" By all accounts, Teflon Howie tap-danced his way through the meeting by pointing to what he claimed was the start of a recovery in Sony's core electronics business. But AP quoted a 64-year-old Sony investor as saying after the meeting he was disappointed with Stringer's explanations. "I wasn't convinced he was going to bring back the legend of Sony. There's this big gap with our image of Sony from the past. We have such big hopes." I'm sure it will comfort this shareholder, and the others, to know that even if Sony's image is dull and tarnished, Sir Howard's is gleaming right now thanks to all that media spit-polishing.

It's a standard Hollywood excuse that there isn't a sufficient talent pool of minorities from which to choose executives. Well, that's horseshit. So I disagree with Patrick Goldstein's latest Los Angeles Times column, More Color, Please, in which 20th Century Fox Co-Chairman Jim Gianopulos is quoted as saying, "It's not for lack of interest or desire, because we're constantly searching for creative people. But it's a really difficult question and we haven't found an answer yet." I have. Because I've learned that Gianopolis couldn't have been bothered to attend his own studio's dinner organized by its so-called diversity department a few years ago. I'm told Fox hosted the event in its executive dining room to gather together a sizeable portion of minority execs to show how "progressive" the studio wanted to become. "The dinner created a big stir in the African-American Hollywood community. It was presented as an opportunity for Fox execs to meet who was out there. When the Fox invites went out, calls and emails were sent wondering who was invited and what is was all about," one attendee told me. "When we got there it was almost like a class reunion -- about 50-60 some black, Latino, Asian execs and producers."

But, soon, reality set in, I learned. "We all sat there wondering what the point was as [studio film executives] Bob Harper, Liz Gabler and Peter Rice moved from table to table in speed-dating fashion introducing themselves. At the end of the day nothing happened for anyone who attended -- even though there were numerous people there who had studio/production company experience and were more than qualified for any studio job. Had Gianopolis been there, he would have realized that, yes, in great numbers we would love to be seriously considered for these jobs."

Something similar happened at another movie studio, MGM, a few years back, too. "MGM basically said they were looking for a black exec," one applicant told me. "It looked like a cattle call outside their offices. Every single black person I knew took a meeting. This is usually the case when a studio quietly says they are looking for someone of color. The fact of the matter is that we are out here and we are not that hard to find."

I abhor how Hollywood is a business where cronyism flourishes as far as studio and network executives are employed. Where execs don't get hired because they don't play on the same golf course or don't send their kids to the same schools. So how in the world can blacks and Latinos and Asians get a foot in the door when diversity is definitely discouraged even among whites? Nor is this just a studio practice. At agencies CAA, ICM, Morris, UTA, Endeavor and the like, it's considered a sop to diversity that gentile agents are employed at all (though Italians have long been considered faux Jews in that biz). Morris has more minority agents than all the other top agencies combined, but that's still hardly any.

True, we already know that the hiring of minority actors and directors is disgustingly dismal. But the situation for minority writers is about to get a whole lot worse. Bad enough they've seen little progress in job opportunities during the past seven years and remain under-represented, a 2005 Writers Guild of America West report showed. Minority employment in features is under 6%, and in TV is under 10%. But, for the 2006/2007 TV season, several urban-oriented shows disappeared when the UPN and WB form the CW. The WGA points out that the 130 black writers hired last TV season were concentrated at UPN, which employed 58 of those scribes. But some of those jobs have disappeared because the shows have disappeared now that the network has disappeared. (See my previous Screwing the TV Viewers).

Minority hiring in Hollywood is a hot button issue, and it pushes the buttons of minorities already working in showbiz. Complained a veteran African-American development exec at a TV/movie production company who didn't want me to use his name: "One of the problems about these articles that come out every so often is that they never interview black execs even if in confidence (most would be afraid to tell the truth). They always go after high-level talent to comment, when some of said talent (not specifically referring to Spike Lee or John Singleton who are both interviewed) have a problem with hiring minorities as their execs, agents, managers, etc. for fear of not seeming legitimate in the community as a whole. The fact of the matter is that this issue is brought up quite often asking why are there not enough minority representation in the agencies, studios and production companies. The standard response is that 'we' would rather be in front of the camera instead of behind the camera. Of course, this is an out-an-out lie. The idea that we would rather be Puffy or Jermaine Dupree is insulting. Unfortunately, as you are well aware, this is a vindictive industry and many of us who hope to gain a slice of the industry pie are afraid to comment about the realities of the situation and remain publicly silent. I know many people who have looked at this recent article in disgust as 1) Same story, different month and 2) Did he even try to talk to any of the current and/or past execs about the situation?  Why are you using John Singleton and Spike Lee as your only sources?"

Goldstein himself did a small survey of African American or Latino production executives at a vice president level or higher and found one executive at 20th Century Fox, New Line and Paramount, none at Universal, Warner Bros., Disney and Sony Pictures. But he failed to mention how the latter studio did go after the one African-American who's never had trouble getting hired as an exec: film critic Elvis Mitchell. He had a stint as director of development at Paramount under his pal Brandon Tartikoff but departed after six months. And then he had another opportunity at Sony Pictures which he blew big-time. Here's what I know: a year after Mitchell left The New York Times as its marquee movie reviewer, Sony's Columbia Pictures announced it was hiring Mitchell to start a New York office with producer Deborah Schindler in March of 2005. The studio hoped Mitchell would scout new minority talent and make movies for minority audiences. But he never showed up for work, insiders told me, so Schindler proceeded to do the job solo. To this day, no one at Sony knows why Mitchell went AWOL, and he refuses to talk about it. In this case, he really was hard to find. 

I was shocked to hear that Hollywood types were already leaving town for the July 4th holiday. It's bad enough you guys cancel four straight scheduled meetings with screenwriters. Or have your assistants book appointments six months ahead which you'll cancel anyway. And all without a twinge of guilt. But lately you've become Slacker Town. So here's why Hollywood gets no work done:

June: Spend most of the month coordinating travel plans to hobnob with Bob Wright on Nantucket or Nora-and-Nick in the Hamptons on a summer kick-off long weekender. Plan to leave on June 20th for July 4th "weekend" vacation to Canyon Ranch, Cal-a-Vie or The Peaks because you think you're too fat to cruise the Mediterranean with Geffen or Diller.

July: Spend days jumping for joy that Ron Meyer has permanently canceled his ridiculously crowded annual July 4th party. Return from July 4th weekend just in time to depart for Allen & Co.'s Sun Valley investment conference. (Bring lots of DVDs to avoid the embarrassment of being seen with everyone mentioned in the Pellicano scandal.) Depart July 25th for August vacation.

August: The first part of the month is your official vacation in your East Coast owned or rented property in the Hamptons or Connecticut or Martha's Vineyard. The second part of the month is your unofficial vacation at the Four Seasons on the Big Island to recover from the real and perceived slights you suffered the first part of the month. Ignore Emmys.

September: Return to work September 10th. Depart for Toronto Film Festival on September 12. Take week off for each High Holy Day, then take more time after you blame imagined food poisoning at the break-the-fast meal at your mother's. Take off for annual Aspen confab by Forstmann Little & Co.

October: Work, unless your studio owns a theme park that gets decorated for Halloween, or your agency is figuring your salary/bonus for next year, or you're Brad Grey, Tom Freston, Les Moonves and Jim Wiatt and you're planning another "Danger Boys' week together (previous jaunts took them to Cuba or the Amazon). Overbook your trainer and therapist and golf pro so you have an excuse to leave work early.

November: Departures for Thanksgiving on the East Coast begin November 15th. Spend a week supervising just which $10,000 Frank Lloyd Wright tchochke you'll give to Joel Silver to spend Turkey Day at his South Carolina plantation. 

December: Return from NYC power shopping trip with the family on December 6th to keep your third wife from divorcing you. Don't forget to get the Oscar screeners back from the nanny before you head to Hawaii or St. Bart's December 10th. Then spend New Year's Eve ice skating with Ah-nold in Sun Valley.

January: Return from Xmas/New Year's vacation January 8th. Tell everyone how hard you're working, then leave January 11th for Sundance. Slink away to Aspen for a vacation from Sundance.

February: Schedule fitting days for those new tuxes and evening gowns, spa days for those slimming treatments, and dermatologist days for those Botox injections. Waste even more time partying with people you hate because it's the dreaded awards time.

March: Spend month in hiding after the dreaded awards time. That means your office. Working.

April: Take off Passover Week to recover from imagined food poisoning at Sandy Gallin's seder. Remember which kids in the house are yours during their school vacation.

May: Spend 10 days in NYC sweating out the network upfronts. Spend 10 days sweating out the frog critics in Cannes. Spend another 10 days getting "lost" on your way back from NYC or Cannes after you've dropped your Blackberry in the trash.

And then it's June again, back where you began.

According to Broadcasting & Cable's Multichannel News, the 2006 political advertising market is overheating even without a presidential race. Candidates and issue-oriented groups have spent $440 million on advertising through early June. That’s $110 million more than political advertisers spent in 2004 through the same date. Overall, U.S. political ad spending is projected to top $1 billion overall, most of it flowing over broadcast and cable TV outlets, according to new estimates from TNS Media Intelligence's Campaign Media Analysis Group, a leading political ad-tracking firm. Driving the largesse: 36 races for state governor. Spending associated with gubernatorial campaigns will be double the amount spent by the Bush and Kerry presidential campaigns in 2004. In California, more than $60 million already has been spent on the Democratic Primary contest for the governor’s race. Television will account for close to 85% of all political spending. Issue-centered advertising is on the rise, with $195 million of the $440 million spent through early June flowing from groups attempting to influence voter attitudes on ballot initiatives and legislation in general. Spot cable should get a strong share of spending from U.S. House and Senate races believed to be “in play” by Democratic party leaders intent on winning back majorities. But sellers will have to be patient: For these races, more than 90% of the dollars will flow over the final 60 days of campaigning.

My pal, L.A. screenwriter Bruce Feirstein, received a lot of hate mail for his latest New York Observer column imagining new movie ratings by the Motion Picture Association of America, which therefore endears this piece to me. What prompted him was Facing the Giants, that film about the Christian football coach which received a “PG” rating because of “thematic” elements -- not drugs, not violence and not sex, but religion. "I’m no prude. I’ve worked on my share of movies with cartoon violence and sexual innuendo," Bruce writes. "But looking at the MPAA’s decision, I can’t help but wonder if it’s possible to make any film today without it issuing a content warning. Forget about the biblical epics, like The Ten Commandments. I’m thinking about Lassie, where the family sits down to pray before dinner... If the MPAA is going to follow this path, let’s go the whole nine yards (as opposed to the whole hog, which would undoubtedly be offensive to Muslims, Jews and animal-rights activists), and institute the following new, improved movie ratings (about which the MPAA sent the NYO a form letter):

Oh, those workaholic Walt Disney lawyers. They're plotting to make Pirates of the Caribbean 2 a merchandising juggernaut to match its predicted box office numbers for July 7th. I've learned they've registered the trademark for Johnny Depp's pirate character, Jack Sparrow, in a tsunami of categories, including bikinis and bolo ties and badminton sets, licorice and lemonade and leg warmers, bagels and bowling balls and BBQ mits! (Although